三教平心論 1.24

1.24

愈又曰。舜禹在位百年。此時中國無佛。漢明帝時始有佛法。在位纔十八年。殊不知。脩短之數係於善惡。而善惡之報通乎三世。故曰。欲知前世因。今生享者是。欲知後世果。今生作者是。以是知。今世之脩短。原於前世之善惡。而今世之善惡。又所以基後世之脩短。享國之久者。前世之善為之。運祚之促者。前世之惡為之也。豈可徒以目前論之。又豈有佛無佛之所至哉。孔子言。仁者壽。則是仁者必長年。不仁者必折夭也。然克己復禮。回可謂仁矣。而回反夭。膳人之肝。跖可謂不仁也。而跖反壽。豈可謂孔子之說無驗而不從其教乎。洪範以皇極五福六極教人。合極則福而壽。反極則禍而凶。短折如漢之文景。最為有道之主。惟皇作極。二君宜無愧矣。而孝文在位纔二十三載。年止四十七。孝景在位纔十六載。年止四十八。其曆數皆未及一世。其享年皆未及下壽。豈可謂洪範之說誣而火其書矣。惟證之以因果之說。稽之以三世之久。則可以釋然無疑矣。如必曰無佛而壽永。則舜禹在位固皆至百年也。唐武宗滅佛者也。胡為在位僅六年。而壽止三十三乎。如必曰有佛而年夭。則漢明享國纔十八年也。梁武帝奉佛者也。胡為在位四十八年。而壽至八十六乎。

Yu further said: 'Shun and Yu were on the throne for a hundred years; at this time, there was no Buddha in China. In the time of Emperor Ming of the Han, the Buddha-Dharma first appeared, and he was on the throne for only eighteen years.' Little did he know that the span of longevity and shortness of life depends on good and evil, and the retribution of good and evil extends through the three time periods. Therefore it is said: 'If you wish to know the causes of past lives, look at what you experience in this life; if you wish to know the fruits of future lives, look at what you do in this life.' From this we know that the longevity or brevity of this life originates from the good and evil of past lives, and the good and evil of this life in turn lays the foundation for the longevity or brevity of future lives. The longevity of a sovereign's reign is caused by the good of past lives; the brevity of a dynastic fortune is caused by the evil of past lives. How can one judge merely by what is before one's eyes? And how could it be caused by the presence or absence of the Buddha? Confucius said: 'The benevolent are long-lived.' If so, then the benevolent must have long years, and the unbenevolent must die prematurely. Yet Yan Hui, who 'subdued himself and returned to propriety', can be called benevolent, and yet Hui died young. Robber Zhi, who fed on the livers of men, can be called unbenevolent, and yet Zhi lived long. Can one say that Confucius's statement lacked verification and therefore refuse to follow his teaching? The Great Plan instructs people through the royal standard, the five blessings, and the six extremes. Conforming to the standard brings blessing and longevity; opposing the standard brings disaster and misfortune. In premature death, Emperors Wen and Jing of the Han were rulers of the highest virtue, and regarding the sovereign establishing the standard, the two monarchs should have had no shame. Yet Filial Wen was on the throne for only twenty-three years and his age reached only forty-seven; Filial Jing was on the throne for only sixteen years and his age reached only forty-eight. Their reigns did not even reach a single generation, and their spans of life did not even reach lower longevity. Can one say that the statement of the Great Plan is false and burn its book? Only by verifying it with the doctrine of cause and effect and examining it across the span of the three periods can one become clear and free of doubt. If one must insist that without the Buddha one enjoys long life, Shun and Yu were indeed on the throne for a hundred years; but Emperor Wuzong of the Tang destroyed Buddhism—why was he on the throne for only six years, and his lifespan reached only thirty-three? If one must insist that with the Buddha one's years are cut short, Emperor Ming of the Han reigned for only eighteen years; but Emperor Wu of the Liang was an adherent of Buddhism—why was he on the throne for forty-eight years, and his lifespan reached eighty-six?